# 197 Ben Jabo - Comment - Israel News | Haaretz Daily Newspaper
  • p.TextOutput { R static java.lang.String p.mt = 'com.polopoly.cm.app.policy.SingleValuePolicy'; R static java.lang.String p.publicInterfaces = 'com.polopoly.cm.app.policy.SingleValued'; R static java.lang.String p.beanClass = 'com.polopoly.cm.app.policy.SingleValuePolicy'; RW java.lang.String value = '0'; R transient java.lang.Object _data = 'com.polopoly.cm.app.policy.NumberInputPolicy'; },ModelStore=com.polopoly.model.ModelStoreInMap p.TextOutput { R static java.lang.String p.mt = 'com.polopoly.cm.app.policy.SingleValuePolicy'; R static java.lang.String p.publicInterfaces = 'com.polopoly.cm.app.policy.SingleValued'; R static java.lang.String p.beanClass = 'com.polopoly.cm.app.policy.SingleValuePolicy'; RW java.lang.String value = '0'; R transient java.lang.Object _data = 'com.polopoly.cm.app.policy.NumberInputPolicy'; },ModelStore=com.polopoly.model.ModelStoreInMap
    • Nick Ferriman
    • 07.10.07 | 06:49 (IST)

    Dear Ben Jabo, Thank you for taking the time to reply to my post. Your reporting of history is of course very one-sided. You say that in 1948 the ?Arabs had the same opportunity as Israel to declare their independent state?. Did they act opportunistically, and grab what was not theirs? Did they act against the UK/UN Mandate, that is to say, did they break international agreements by declaring independence? I don?t think so. That makes Israel the protagonist in the hostilities that followed. In 1956, the Suez Crisis was sparked by Egypt?s action in nationalising the Canal. That is true. But the UK and the US had agreed previously to this, and only got upset when the Egyptians bought tanks from the Soviet block rather than themselves. There is nothing illegitimate in demanding sovereignty of infrastructure that passes through one?s territory. However, before US led talks could bring about a resolution to the problem, Israel, France and the UK took the law into their own hands. They launched their infamous invasion. The US quite rightly, did not stand for this, and ordered all sides to withdraw. They did. However, I think the Israelis gained, they always do. Their wars are designed to extend their territory. They go to war with this number one objective. Israel I think occupied Gaza at this time, and have never given it back. Correct me if I am wrong. As for 1967, you refuse to acknowledge that Israel again attacked first. It is common knowledge that it did. You don?t have to have a degree in history to know this. You claim that the Arabs provoked the war. Really? Well, what about the time the IAF shot down six Syrian Migs over Damascus? This was well before the 6-day war. But it was typical of the way Israel has repeatedly ramped up tensions to provoke responses to justify its wars of enlargement. There was also the strike they launched into Jordan, again prior to the 6-day war. Each of these two incidents alone was an act of war. Your version of history is flawed at every step. I suggest you change your CD-ROM. You even have the gall to try and make out that the invasion of Lebanon in 1982 was legitimate. You invaded someone else?s sovereign territory again on the pretext this time that it was the PLO who posed you a mortal threat. Nonsense. They were not. They were a busted flush already. The real war aim was to remove the PLO as a symbol, and to show the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories that their position, like those in the refugee camps, was utterly hopeless. They should accept meekly the Israeli jackboot. But we know where that mentality leads, don?t we? We have seen it enough times. It is why we have the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, a document born of the Holocaust. And right on cue Sharon, the architect of the invasion, went and butchered hundreds of unarmed Palestinians in the Sabra and Shatilla refugee camps. You then lay the blame for the war in 2006 with Hezbollah. You must be reading straight from a potted version of the Shin Beth handbook on disinformation You criticize Hezbollah for attacking across the Israel border, but make no mention of traffic the other way. The IAF have violated Lebanese airspace on an almost daily basis since 2000. Why don?t you mention that, or of their strikes that have killed many innocent people? You make no mention either of the repeated artillery salvoes into southern Lebanon throughout this time, nor of the commando raids deep into Lebanon to hit at military and political targets. These are sins of omission. Your apologies for Israel have defenestrated history, as Israeli actions have defenestrated democracy. Neither you or Israel is going to get away with it. Both concepts are too precious to be sabotaged by charlatans. Regards.

    from the article: Na'ima is threatening the Jewish majority
    First published 00:00 03.10.07 | Last updated 00:00 03.10.07
Haaretz Headlines
The West Bank settlement of Alon Shvut, following the shooting attack on June 29, 2015.

Israeli soldier lightly wounded in suspected attack

IDF forces open fire on a speeding car that hit a soldier outside a military outpost in the West Bank.

An evening of song and unity in honor of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. at The Bayit

Has U.S. Modern Orthodoxy reached its breaking point?

The most influential Jewish community in America is in deep crisis. Will the different streams of Modern Orthodoxy go their separate ways? A special report from New York.

Illustration by Netalie Ron-Raz

Road to civil marriage runs through same-sex divorce

In Israel, even Jewish couples who were married outside of the country can only be granted a divorce by the Rabbinate. Thus, same-sex couples who wish to separate find themselves in a legal lacuna.


'If we don't learn from plants, we're in trouble'

Prof. Daniel Chamovitz, a U.S.-born expert on plant genetics, explains why our lives depend on plants, even though we take them for granted.